Grade question

12 feet of track from zero to 6 inches is about 4.3% grade which is a little steep. A locomotive by itself won't have problems but have you tried with cars attached? You need to test with the 'normal' number of cars you usually attach to a locomotive.

Joe

An alternative is to start at 3" and go down 3" in 12 feet on one line while going up 3" in 12 feet on the other. The resultant grade is a much more manageable 2.2%. It's more work from a build perspective, but will provide for better operation and better scenery as the layout will look more natural.

That steep you will need lots of traction tires cuz you're gonna tear them up quick

You'll need engines with speed control for the downslope or a nice wide radius turn at the bottom. Some voltage control if you run conventional engines. It could get exciting!

Thanks for your input guys, I'm running mth engines all with 2.0+ the other grade rise /decline will hopefully be less than 3.5% I have more room on that part of the table. But I do plan on running consists of 2 to 3 loco's so the 4.3% grade shouldn't be a problem.

I think most of us wind up with un reasonable grades because of space problems.My riser is bad also but a 1/4 O-72 curve at the base helps a little.

I am building a similar layout with double over-under reverse loops.  I used Matt's suggestion, and it really calmed down those steep grades.  A little additional benchwork, but it's worth it.  Haven't started the scenery yet, but the possibilites are endless because of the elevations.  Good luck.

 

Mike

If you can stretch the run to 16 feet (possibly around a curve)  and cut the rise to 5" your grade will get better.  

5/(16X12)X 100 = 2.6%  

Even at 6"  3.1%  

Eventually I found that my layout grades took so much distance the entire loop with the grades was either up or down.

Both bridges pictured are part of the grades.

the other way is to do the rise is in steps that have level parts like a landings. so that you rise at 4% then go 0% the go 4%. this way the engines can pull on a flat at certain points. 

Building on Matt's comments, when I design a layout I first locate the pivotal over/under positions. 

 

On a simple two plane pike the median of the rail head to bottom of overpass clearance becomes the main deck datum. 

 

Play around with the over/under position until you arrive at an optimal location which will facllitate the most favorable grades. 

I found out the hard way that six inches in not enough clearance for a MTH double stack.  Looks like it will be a single stack when I get ready to run trains.

 

Thanks guys, I have major space limits. The layout is located on the upstairs of the garage and is right at the peak. I've cut it down to 5.5in, I've tested a single loco with 6 cars and does pretty good climbing to the top, I should get the other slope complete by next week and give it a full run and let you all know how it works out.

How much clearance did you end up needing? I don't have any double stacks, but may someday. My grade and track is not yet permanent so now is the time to make the change

The car sits about six inches high on the track measured from the bottom of the tie to the top of the car.  I used a MTH Steel Arch Bridge for my crossover.  The track sits at six inches.  The under side of the bridge has a molded girder that stick down about one half inch and the car will not clear the bridge.  I can't raise the bridge any higher, so I'm stuck.  I checked and the containers come apart so I'll just run it as a single stack just like the CSX trains that run near my house.

Thanks for the explanation. I may add an extra 1/2 inch and keep an eye on the bridge i purchase in the future.